W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-html-editor@w3.org > October to December 2000

M12N Issue: XHTML 2.0 in current Modularization

From: Sean Palmer <wapdesign@wapdesign.org.uk>
Date: Mon, 30 Oct 2000 11:49:28 -0000
Message-ID: <004501c04271$0c672d80$41dc93c3@z5n9x1>
To: <www-html-editor@w3.org>
Cc: <www-html@w3.org>, "Tapio Markula" <tapio1@gamma.nic.fi>, "Masayasu Ishikawa" <mimasa@w3.org>
Dear HTML WG (et al.),
How will XHTML 2.0 modules[1] flow into the current m12n specification?
Imagine, for example, that the structure module is replaced. This means that
a 2.0 as well as 1.0 version of the Structure module will be allowable in
m12n implementation. Therefore, shouldn't the XHTML 2.0 spec. be
complemented with an update to m12n - telling us how to use 2.0 in m12n?
If not, there should be more mention of the future in m12n: i.e. it should
be a guide to Modularizing XHTML, not just Modularizing XHTML 1.1 If it
can't meet these objectives, then surely it isn't forwards-compatible; and
that is the major point of having m12n in the first place!
Further to that, what happens if some of the modules in 2.0 are the same as
1.1 - what namespace do we use? How do we mix 1.1 with 2.0. I see great
problems emerging here, and hope someone can point me in the right
direction.

[1] I am presuming 2.0 will be modular! If not, why not?

Credit due to Tapio Markula for pointing some of these issues out: "The
modularization mechanism should be designed
to fulfil future needs."

Kindest Regards,
Sean B. Palmer
WAP Tech Info - http://www.waptechinfo.com/
Received on Monday, 30 October 2000 07:59:53 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 27 March 2012 18:16:49 GMT